Journalism in the Public Interest

ProPublica on Twitter

The FBI Responds To Our Anthrax Stories

After editorials in The New York Times and The Washington Post call for new investigations into the 2001 anthrax attacks, the FBI issues a statement defending its conclusion that Army scientist Bruce E. Ivins was behind the letters that killed five people.

A sign on the door of a Biosafety Level-4 laboratory at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Fort Detrick, Md. (Patrick Semansky/AP Photo)

In a letter to the editor of The New York Times, a top FBI official today disputed recent reports by ProPublica, PBS’ “Frontline” and McClatchy that challenged evidence in the agency’s investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks and its conclusion that Army scientist Bruce Ivins was the perpetrator.

The letter from FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs Michael P. Kortan followed editorials in The Times and The Washington Post that called for new, independent investigations into the anthrax case, which the FBI officially closed 18 months after Ivins committed suicide in the summer of 2008.

Kortan’s letter largely repeats prior claims in defense of the case, some of which were covered in our stories. Here are key points from the letter and what we reported:

Ivins’ suspicious lab hours

Ivins was a top anthrax researcher at the U.S. Army Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Fort Detrick, Md. He produced vaccines and tested them on lab animals. The FBI has said a spike in Ivins’ nighttime lab hours before the mailings explains when he prepared the letters.

What Kortan wrote: “[I]t was directly relevant that Dr. Ivins worked long hours alone during the time of the mailings in the laboratory’s ‘hot suites,’ where the anthrax that was genetically linked to the attack spores was produced and handled. He had not done that before the mailings, nor did he ever do it again.”

Ivins’ anthrax samples

Once the FBI determined the letters contained a strain of anthrax common in labs, the bureau asked scientists to submit samples of their spores. The FBI has said Ivins tried to hide his guilt by sending a false sample from his spore collection. Genetic tests later showed the spores in Ivins’ flask – RMR-1029 – matched the letter spores.

Email messages and lab notebooks show that two years later Ivins helped a colleague collect a sample of RMR-1029 specifically for FBI evidence. Finally, the very first sample Ivins gave the FBI in February 2002 was rejected because it was in the wrong type of test tube. It was later tracked down, and tests determined it to be a close match to the letter spores.

What Kortan wrote: “Dr. Ivins submitted an intentionally misleading sample in April 2002 that was free of genetic markers. Samples of his anthrax spores that contained the genetic markers were either submitted before he realized the markers might trap him or were seized later by the F.B.I., not made available by Dr. Ivins.”

Was the anthrax treated?

FBI and other scientists who examined the attack spores found that they contained silicon, tin and some other elements. The presence of those elements fueled speculation that the spores were treated – weaponized – to make them more dispersible. The FBI has said its studies show the silicon was the result of a natural process.

What Kortan wrote: “[S]cientists directly involved in the lengthy investigation into the anthrax mailings — both from within the F.B.I. and outside experts — disagree with the notion that the chemicals in the mailed anthrax suggest more sophisticated manufacturing.”

15 comments

Too bad Kortan didn’t also mention that Ivins found no reason to be in his BSL-3 lab during the times he was allegedly waiting for the anthrax letters to be delivered.

He worked long hours in room B313 from August 31 to September 16 to prepare the media letters.

He spent almost no time in B313 from September 17 to September 27 while waiting for the letters to have their effects. (During the evening of September 17 he was allegedly driving to New Jersey to mail the letters.)

When the first letters failed to have the desired effect, he again worked long hours in room B313 from September 28 to October 5 to prepare the senate letters.

As soon as those letters were mailed, he again spent almost no time in room B313.

Plus, the facts indicate that Ivins was NOT working in “other labs and offices” in the evenings as ProPublica claims. The facts indicate that Ivins only worked in HIS OWN office when he wasn’t in his OWN Suite B3 (except, perhaps, for a few minutes checking on animals for someone else). In his OWN OFFICE, he appears to have spent his time on PERSONAL emails, not on Army work. And, he destroyed all of his emails from 2001 before the FBI could copy his hard drive and use his emails as evidence of what he was doing.

Ivins was NOT REQUIRED to work 16 hour days. He appears to have been “going to the office” to putter around on his computer rather than spend time at home with his wife and family. Much of his personal time on his computer in his office was spent sending emails to former associates and old friends. The copies of Ivins’ emails used as evidence against Ivins were evidently obtained from computers belonging to the RECIPIENTS of his emails.

Ed Lake is, of course, once again writing completely untrue statements - and it seems that this is calculated and deliberate. The reason Dr Ivins did not enter the suite in the evenings between October 5 and October 9 is because he wasn’t scheduled to check animals on these evenings - someone else was.
Dr Ivins followed his work schedule to the letter - his calendar shows this very plainly. The very nights the FBI accuse him of preparing dry anthrax spores with no basis whatsoever, he was scheduled to check animals in the evening.

That’s precisely what his calendar called on him to do – work these very eight consecutive nights checking on the animals. Good statistics need to be obtained to see exactly when animals died in order to properly analyze the effectiveness of vaccines – hence he did it at the same time every evening.

Watchmaker wrote: “The reason Dr Ivins did not enter the suite in the evenings between October 5 and October 9 is because he wasn’t scheduled to check animals on these evenings - someone else was.”

Ivins LEFT THE SUITE when it was time to check on the animals on September 28, 29, 30 and October 1 and 2. So, checking on animals has NOTHING to do with what Ivins was doing in his lab in room B313.

If you plan to argue that the animals were in room B313 and that the logs are WRONG when they show Ivins left Suite B3 to check on them, you need to supply some SOLID PROOF, since the idea that Ivins kept rabbits and mice in his crowded 11x17 foot laboratory is just plain NUTS.

If you believe that the mice and rabbits were in Ivins’ BSL-3 lab in room B313, who do you believe checked on them on those evenings when Ivins wasn’t scheduled to do it?

Also, the FBI Summary Report says in the footnote on page 32:

“It bears mention that during the first five days of this second phase, Dr. Ivins did make notations regarding the health of some mice involved in a study being conducted by another colleague – thus justifying his presence in the lab for a short time on each of those days (Friday, September 28 through Tuesday, October 2). However, the first three of those days, he was in the hot suites for well over an hour, far longer than necessary to check to see if any mice were dead. And for the three nights before each mailing window, Dr. Ivins was in the hot suites for between two and four hours each night, with absolutely no explanation.”

So, who was the other colleague? One of Ivins’ assistants, Pat Fellows or Kristie Friend? Would they be doing mice experiments on their own? Or was it Patricia Worsham? If it was Worsham, wouldn’t the mice be in HER lab? There was an “animal room” for mice in Suite B3 in Room B310. Why would Ivins keep mice in his lab if there was special room for mice in Suite B3.

The in-out logs say that Ivins left Suite B3 when it was time to check on the mice and rabbits. So, the mice and rabbits were NOT in Suite B3.

The TOTALITY of the evidence and evidence in context points to Ivins.
All conspiracy theories take facts out of context.
The JFK conspircists have been doing this for yrs, but there again the totality of evidence supports the conclusion of the Warren Commission.

What about his obsession with the sorority and the young woman PhD from that sorority? Letters mailed from the mailbox near the sorority.
If he didn’t do this, who did?

Well, does it matter now that President Obama has approved the anthrax vaccine in children? If they get a vaccine , that means they will be tested for anthrax exposure at some time, not just serum antibodies.

That’s a very good comparison, since the evidence says that Oswald was also guilty. Yet, there are people who argue that BOTH Oswald and Ivins were innocent. And those people have their own theories about who committed the crimes: It was “the government.”

GR wrote: “If he didn’t do this, who did?”

If the theorists don’t believe “the government” did it, then they usually think al Qaeda did it, but they have only a “gut feeling” to support their theory. There’s a small crowd that believes “Jews” did it. After that, it seems that every theory is unique. In the past ten years I’ve heard probably two dozen different theories. The suspects range from next door neighbors to authors who wrote books on the subject to music industry executives.

The only common thread is that they all believe Ivins was innocent, because if Ivins was guilty, that means that every one of these people with theories is wrong. And they simply cannot believe that every one of them is wrong.

The FBI found a fall guy, which is all they were supposed to do. The same people that brought us the treasonous attack at the WTC, brought us this anthrax attack. Remember, ATCC (the decentralized corporate entity of the US BioWeapons Division) sold Iraq weaponized anthrax and other super-biotoxins, hoping they’d use them against Iran (probably contingent upon such usage). The government kept a part of this stash, and used it in 2001 to drive the terror message home, knowing that even people far from NYC, who might be reluctant to go to war, would see the necessity of it, after being thus attacked. An envelope can reach anyone, right?

And as long as we were struggling with chaos, destruction, loss and fear, we wouldn’t question our leadership about war; and we wouldn’t ask why the evidence was sent away to Europe and the crime scene destroyed, and who stole the trillions in gold bars and bouillion in the basement of the WTC. We’d lose track of the investigation the Germans supposedly conducted on the hard drives in WTC Bldg. 7; and we’d forget that they’re carrying out Adam Weishaupt’s 25-point plan for global takeover, right under our noses.

ProPublica, my personal visits and contacts with the DOJ and FBI seem futile.

Please see if you can get the FBI to respond to Obama’s refusal to take action on quotes from Numerous Federal Court Judges that prove insurance Company Doctors’ ignore life threatening medical conditions including Brain lesions and Multiple Sclerosis, cardiac conditions of many patients, and a foot that a new mother broke in 5 places.

The quotes can be seen by pasting the following website:

deadlyorganizedcrimes.blogspot.com

Please also see if you can get the DOJ and FBI to respond to Obama’s protection of Wachovia bank laundering $378 billion for murderous drug cartels, and all the other corporate crimes Obama is protecting as seen at :

obamadrugmurdersconnection.blogspot.com

Then there’s insurance companies committing identical crimes and endangering lives in five different types of insurance while Obama and Bush protected them, as seen by pasting :

treasonevidence.blogspot.com

You or someone you know will be on a local or Federal Grand jury soon. Obama and Bush and many of their administrations top leaders should be indicted for multiple treasons and insurrections against the laws of the U.S. as evidenced at the websites above and their links !!

who the hell is Jenny Hurly and why would you “expect that from me” to be untruthful? I supported this president. He was in Denver this p week, the article ran that he was considering it, then on Sat said he approved it and I caught, just barely an article that it is now on hold. I printed it. You can check the Denver Post. I didn’t make that up, neither did http://www.my.firedoglake.com re radiation experiments in children in 1927, or all the other experiments, Tuskeegee study syphilus, now Guam, as a nurse, I know alot of junk science experiments that occur in hospitals. Code of Silence that I don’t adhere to anymore, I don’t work anymore. Never leave your kids alone in the hospital. NEVER.

Commenting on this story is closed.

Multimedia

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

Safeguard the public interest

Republish This Story for Free

Thank you for your interest in republishing the story. You are are free republish it so long as you do the following:

You can’t edit our material, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. (For example, "yesterday" can be changed to "last week," and "Portland, Ore." to "Portland" or "here.")

If you’re republishing online, you have link to us and to include all of the links from our story, as well as our PixelPing tag.

You can’t sell our material separately.

It’s okay to put our stories on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories.

You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually.